2007-07-15 15:55:36 · 7 answers · asked by Bonneville P 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
One really has nothing to do with the other.
Except that not spending 12 billion a month to keep the overseas might allow us to spend that money on something more productive -- such as alternative energy sources and pollution cleanup.
2007-07-15 16:01:03 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Directly it would have essentially no effect.
If some of the money we're wasting on the Iraq War were diverted to implementing policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, that would slow global warming. The current president will not allocate the money in this fashion, however.
Basically it will have no effect. The two issues are seperate.
2007-07-16 07:54:02 · answer #2 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Al Gore, Dick Durbin, Diane Fienstein, and Robert Kennedy might start issueing warrant for the arrest of the treasonous Global Warming Denyiers.
2007-07-15 16:00:58 · answer #3 · answered by WCSteel 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
it would sure help to cut down on pollution in iraq - which eventually travels all over the globe.
i would hope many if not most would have a new born respect for freedom/quality of life and be willing to fight for it when they return.
2007-07-15 16:00:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since there's no such thing as "global warming", there wouldn't be any effect.
2007-07-15 16:16:56 · answer #5 · answered by rollinjukebox 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It wouldn't. Use a little common sense here.
2007-07-15 15:58:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
was that english?
2007-07-15 15:58:34 · answer #7 · answered by idontgetit 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋